Why does Djokovic always lose hypotheticals?

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Not always. Very few people would be picking him to lose at the AO when playing well, for example.

But at RG, Wimb and USO, he isn't the best by any stretch of the imagination. Nadal has shown higher levels at RG and Fed has shown higher levels at Wimb and the USO. It's more logical to pick these guys in most hypotheticals concerning these 3 slams.
 

WilPro

Rookie
I think personally it's because his game isn't attractive to the average person, so he will always lose to players playing more attractive games.

Discuss
So, this means whoever likes Djokovic is not an average but superior person. Hahahahahaha!

Rest your case. His game is just plain ugly.
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
Not always. Very few people would be picking him to lose at the AO when playing well, for example.

But at RG, Wimb and USO, he isn't the best by any stretch of the imagination. Nadal has shown higher levels at RG and Fed has shown higher levels at Wimb and the USO. It's more logical to pick these guys in most hypotheticals concerning these 3 slams.
I just read today that Nadal 09 would beat Djokovic 16 at the AO. I'm not sure why saying that isn't seen as insane as saying Djokovic 16 would beat Nadal 08 at the RG
 

Third Serve

Legend
Fed and Nadal have more fans to award hypothetical victories to them. That could be why you see them winning a lot of the polls.

You'll see Djokovic fans awarding him hypothetical victories too (surely you must have seen the posts where people use the 2014-2015 Wimbledon finals to establish Djokovic's superiority over peak 2003-2007 Federer), but they're less common because there simply aren't as many Djokovic fans.

I do think the Federer fanbase tends to put too much emphasis on hypothetical matches, however. He has enough real records that we don't need to resort to hypotheticals. They're sure fun to debate, though!
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I just read today that Nadal 09 would beat Djokovic 16 at the AO. I'm not sure why saying that isn't seen as insane as saying Djokovic 16 would beat Nadal 08 at the RG
Very few people actually believe this. I, for one, don't.

In order to even be a hypothetical, Djokovic needs to not play well and Nadal to be at his best. The former doesn't apply in 2016.

The only Djokovic version I see 2009 Nadal defeating at the AO is 2008.
 

RS

Hall of Fame
I think personally it's because his game isn't attractive to the average person, so he will always lose to players playing more attractive games.

Discuss
Not to forget his oppenents are playing worse than Roddick and Hewitt more often than not.
 

Third Serve

Legend
Very few people actually believe this. I, for one, don't.

In order to even be a hypothetical, Djokovic needs to not play well and Nadal to be at his best. The former doesn't apply in 2016.

The only Djokovic version I see 2009 Nadal defeating at the AO is 2008.
2008 was statistically one of Djokovic's best AO runs, though. It's usually up there with 2016 and 2011.
 
I think personally it's because his game isn't attractive to the average person, so he will always lose to players playing more attractive games.

Discuss
Well given that you are the same one who feels comfortable saying something as patently stupid as that Djokovic of RG 2016 would beat Nadal of RG 2008, it is obvious most peoples guess on hypothetical Djokovic results will not match up to yours, which is no doubt insanely biased in favor of Djokovic.
 

RS

Hall of Fame
Fed and Nadal have more fans to award hypothetical victories to them. That could be why you see them winning a lot of the polls.

You'll see Djokovic fans awarding him hypothetical victories too (surely you must have seen the posts where people use the 2014-2015 Wimbledon finals to establish Djokovic's superiority over peak 2003-2007 Federer), but they're less common because there simply aren't as many Djokovic fans.

I do think the Federer fanbase tends to put too much emphasis on hypothetical matches, however. He has enough real records that we don't need to resort to hypotheticals. They're sure fun to debate, though!
The difference is Djokovic fans base those victories on when they did play and Djokovic won. Federer fans base it on imaginary wins.....
 
Very few people actually believe this. I, for one, don't.

In order to even be a hypothetical, Djokovic needs to not play well and Nadal to be at his best. The former doesn't apply in 2016.

The only Djokovic version I see 2009 Nadal defeating at the AO is 2008.
2009 Nadal would also beat Djokovic at the 2012 AO I believe. He nearly won in 2012, and he was easily worse in the 2012 final and overall event in general than 2009.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
The difference is Djokovic fans base those victories on when they did play and Djokovic won. Federer fans base it on imaginary wins.....
Yeah, beating 2015 Fed guarantees a win over 2008 Fed, which is what many Djokovic fans imply. I don't see how this is more logical.

Federer getting the better of Djokovic at the USO is also based on the matches they did play too.
 
I don't think he was worse in 2012.
Well we will have to agree to disagree there. When people pick Nadal's best AO in terms of playing level I never see anyone pick 2012 over 2009. And in 2012 his worst match of the Final 3 was by far the final, so it was not even his best match at that particular event either (and yes that is even considering he was playing Djokovic).
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
Well given that you are the same one who feels comfortable saying something as patently stupid as that Djokovic of RG 2016 would beat Nadal of RG 2008, it is obvious most peoples guess on hypothetical Djokovic results will not match up to yours, which is no doubt insanely biased in favor of Djokovic.
If 09 Nadal can beat 16 Djokovic then I don't see why 16 Djokovic can't beat 08 Nadal.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Most of those based on the Wim 09 final or something to use that as a general example of a Roddick performace as if he played that way every week.
Well, Wimb 2009 and 2004 finals are better losing efforts than all of Murray's slam final losses.
 
If 09 Nadal can beat 16 Djokovic then I don't see why 16 Djokovic can't beat 08 Nadal.
This makes utterly no sense. In the hypothetical 09 Nadal would be able to beat 2016 Djokovic at Nadal's worst slam and Djokovic's best, which btw I agree he definitely does not, then on what planet would 2016 Djokovic also be able to beat 08 Nadal at Djokovic's worst slam and Nadal's best.

I will put it more easily for you though. 2013 RG Djokovic who played much better at that event than 2016 (he struggled against an out of form Murray on clay in the final, LMFAO) could not even beat Nadal, and was lucky to even be in a 5th set. Nadal who was about 60% at best as good at RG as the 2008 version which was the best ever Nadal at RG. Yet Djokovic wins somehow?
 

RS

Hall of Fame
Well, Wimb 2009 and 2004 finals are better losing efforts than all of Murray's slam final losses.
Better scoreline does not mean better level or harder match.
You are exaggerating here. Not more often than not, just sometimes.
More often than was the case.
Yeah, beating 2015 Fed guarantees a win over 2008 Fed, which is what many Djokovic fans imply. I don't see how this is more logical.

Federer getting the better of Djokovic at the USO is also based on the matches they did play too.
They picked Djokovic to win 5 at Wim in my poll. Aside from Lew and some other trolls.
 

Third Serve

Legend
This makes utterly no sense. In the hypothetical 09 Nadal would be able to beat 2016 Djokovic at Nadal's worst slam and Djokovic's best, which btw I agree he definitely does not, then on what planet would 2016 Djokovic also be able to beat 08 Nadal at Djokovic's worst slam and Nadal's best.

I will put it more easily for you though. 2013 RG Djokovic who played much better at that event than 2016 (he struggled against an out of form Murray on clay in the final, LMFAO) could not even beat Nadal, and was lucky to even be in a 5th set. Nadal who was about 60% at best as good at RG as the 2008 version which was the best ever Nadal at RG. Yet Djokovic wins somehow?
He's simply applying a reductio ad absurdum argument. He doesn't actually believe 2016 Djokovic can beat 2008 Nadal at the French. He's merely using it as an example to demonstrate the absurd claim that 2009 Nadal would beat 2016 Djokovic at the AO.

It's a bit of a poor comparison because the difference in level between 2016 Djoker and 2008 Nadal is larger than the difference in level between 2009 Nadal and 2016 Djoker, but it gets the point across.
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
No, since 2016 Djokovic is not even the best ever Djokovic at the French. Not that the best ever Djokovic would beat Nadal at the French, but this was not even that. AO 2009 Nadal was atleast the best ever Nadal at the AO.
You're overrating 2013 Djokovic. The bloke went missing for a set and ended up fluking out a fourth set. He only GOATED for the first part of the fifth set
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
He's simply applying a reductio ad absurdum argument. He doesn't actually believe 2016 Djokovic can beat 2008 Nadal at the French. He's merely using it as an example to demonstrate the absurd claim that 2009 Nadal would beat 2016 Djokovic at the AO.

It's a bit of a poor comparison because the difference in level between 2016 Djoker and 2008 Nadal is larger than the difference in level between 2009 Nadal and 2016 Djoker, but it gets the point across.
Of course I don't believe 2016 Djokovic would beat 08 Nadal at the French. That's ridiculous. But even you are saying that the difference in level is higher. Why? Because he plays a more attractive? I bet it's that.
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
Well, they were harder matches than Murray's hardest losses: Wimb 2012 and AO 2013.


It's really only a few instances unless you provide clear examples.
It's a different match up dude. Against Djokovic you have to suffer physically in order to keep up with him. Which is why so many players keep up with him for a set or two and then get crushed after.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
This makes utterly no sense. In the hypothetical 09 Nadal would be able to beat 2016 Djokovic at Nadal's worst slam and Djokovic's best, which btw I agree he definitely does not, then on what planet would 2016 Djokovic also be able to beat 08 Nadal at Djokovic's worst slam and Nadal's best.

I will put it more easily for you though. 2013 RG Djokovic who played much better at that event than 2016 (he struggled against an out of form Murray on clay in the final, LMFAO) could not even beat Nadal, and was lucky to even be in a 5th set. Nadal who was about 60% at best as good at RG as the 2008 version which was the best ever Nadal at RG. Yet Djokovic wins somehow?
How was Djokovic much better in 2013 than 2016? In 2016, he was an efficient machine. In that 2013 match, he made so many errors, 30+ more than Nadal, and made that match close solely because Nadal blinked in the 4th set and because of his fighting spirit. And Djokovic didn't struggle against Murray. He basically crushed him. Nadal in 2013 was 60% of his level in 2008? Nadal played his worst match at AO 2012 in the final? Lol.
 
Last edited:

RS

Hall of Fame
Well, they were harder matches than Murray's hardest losses: Wimb 2012 and AO 2013.


It's really only a few instances unless you provide clear examples.
Lots. Gonzo in fire in AO 07. Roddick and Hewitt better than Murray and Old Federer or Fedalovic on clay. Old Agassi being better than Old Federer and so on. Ranking not mattering about the depth etc etc etc.

Harder match lies on so many things. And it is not just Murray was well.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It's a different match up dude. Against Djokovic you have to suffer physically in order to keep up with him. Which is why so many players keep up with him for a set or two and then get crushed after.
Well, several players played well against Fed for a couple of sets and then went away, so I don't see why only Murray's efforts count while the others's efforts are dismissed.
 

Third Serve

Legend
Of course I don't believe 2016 Djokovic would beat 08 Nadal at the French. That's ridiculous. But even you are saying that the difference in level is higher. Why? Because he plays a more attractive? I bet it's that.
Because it's literally Nadal on f**king clay. In the tournament when he broke serve in 51% of return games. In the tournament he won without dropping a single set. No one even comes close to that. Regarding the bolded point, I like watching Federer more than Nadal, but no version of him is beating the Nadal that showed up at RG 2008.

Djokovic at AO is great, but his level of dominance there is more comparable to Fed and Sampras at Wimbledon. Nadal at RG is a few notches above.
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
Well, several players played well against Fed for a couple of sets and then went away, so I don't see why only Murray's efforts count while the others's efforts are dismissed.
They do. But Roddick-Fed aren't as physical while Murray-Djokovic matches are brutal which is why there have been several 7-6 6-7 6-3 6-2 like scorelines between them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Lots. Gonzo in fire in AO 07. Roddick and Hewitt better than Murray and Old Federer or Fedalovic on clay. Old Agassi being better than Old Federer and so on. Ranking not mattering about the depth etc etc etc.

Harder match lies on so many things.
Ok, thank you for the examples.

Gonzo was on fire at the AO in 2007, so I don't see what;s the problem here.

Roddick and Hewitt are not better than Murray and old Fed, just not that much worse either like many Djokovic fans want to believe. At least in terms of level. Saying old Fed and Murray are better than anyone Fed faced is also a bad extreme to adhere to.

Fedovic on clay aren't 100 times better than Hewitt and Roddick on HC/grass. I don't see what's so absurd here.

Old Agassi was simply better on HC in 2004 than old Fed in 2015 or at least on par with him. Old Fed isn't 100 times better than him like some Djokovic fans have you believe.

I don't see what's the problem here. You pretty much looked at one side of the extremes and just glossed over at the extreme of the Djokovic fans without acknowledging it too.
 
Top